Let the games begin! Quadrant 2.0 out with benchmark support for multicore processors and ICS

3. KingKurogiii posted on 14 Feb 2012, 02:12 4 0

the magnitude of the scoring system has decreased.
2200 is like the new 2800-3000.

5. nyamo posted on 14 Feb 2012, 02:18 0 0

are you sure? i'm on a conservative gov and ran it for fun. 3300. debloated sgs2 and small kernel tweak. no oc/uv
and yes i know my setup is pretty bad, but i'm not about speed, but stability and battery life

7. KingKurogiii posted on 14 Feb 2012, 02:25 2 0

until we start seeing more Galaxy S II scores we can't be sure but going by consistency I'd say something is messed up about how yours was scored. maybe this confirms that there's something about Samsung's late model Galaxies that messes with Quadrant.

• This comment is posted in response to #5 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #5 Hide

9. nyamo posted on 14 Feb 2012, 02:28 0 0

over at xda they made a thread for the us varient trying to max the score

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1481904

some older and some with the 2.0 update

• This comment is posted in response to #7 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #7 Hide

18. remixfa posted on 14 Feb 2012, 07:01 0 0

if its an exynos based SGS2, i can still see it being around 3k since it is still the strongest chip. If its a hercules/skyrocket, then no. we know samsung has been messing with the I/O scores for those phones, so maybe it was able to carry over.

• This comment is posted in response to #7 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #7 Hide

20. TARDIS posted on 14 Feb 2012, 07:24 0 0

My sgs2 (att version) - 3228
Looks like its still going on lol

• This comment is posted in response to #18 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #18 Hide

27. KingKurogiii posted on 14 Feb 2012, 09:27 0 0

it's not THAT much more powerful than an OMAP4 though. you should see some of these forums on xda. it's pretty ridiculous how inaccurate these scores are now.

• This comment is posted in response to #18 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #18 Hide

29. remixfa posted on 14 Feb 2012, 09:36 0 0

I havent seen the new scores yet for omap and exynos. if you have, visualize them without the I/O scores, which if i remember correctly is the first blue area of the score. it will probably close the "performance gap" quite a bit as the rest is actual CPU/gpu results. Gotta keep an eye on samsung's I/O score tampering. :)

• This comment is posted in response to #27 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #27 Hide

23. iamcc posted on 14 Feb 2012, 08:33 0 0

Mine got 2400 and i'm underclocked to 1.0ghz with a conservative gov.

26. JEEPOFFROADV8 posted on 14 Feb 2012, 09:22 0 0

2800 on my evo 3d stock. first run

30. ericsorensen posted on 14 Feb 2012, 11:35 0 0

Mine Gnex scored a 3000, but it's overclocked a bit to 1.35Ghz

31. ZayZay posted on 14 Feb 2012, 11:37 0 0

3557 on my GS2E4GT

43. GeekMovement posted on 02 Mar 2012, 23:19 0 0

Just got 3435, I guess the SGSII aren't too bad.

13. nyamo posted on 14 Feb 2012, 02:45 0 0

i can only score a 6150 in antutu which i think makes more sense. having the nexus just barely out score me

14. Sniggly posted on 14 Feb 2012, 03:51 0 0

What makes you say that?

16. nyamo posted on 14 Feb 2012, 06:39 0 0

my basic setup, i can make it butter smooth, or i can save battery.

19. remixfa posted on 14 Feb 2012, 07:02 0 0

you need to give it a lil time KK, the dev said he is going to upgrade the graphs and such when he gets more information from everyone's benchmarks with the new system.

35. baldilocks posted on 14 Feb 2012, 12:54 0 0

I'd post a screenshot if I knew how to leave a link here....

37. beatsandmelody posted on 14 Feb 2012, 18:37 0 0

Just put it on some other site and link it. Dropbox public folder... Or even upload it to FB, and copy the direct img url to link here.

40. baldilocks posted on 15 Feb 2012, 04:12 0 0

Ok, let's see if this works:http://tinyurl.com/7ak9s99

• This comment is posted in response to #37 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #37 Hide